Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

More on Immigration and Amnesty
The Corner ^ | 11/23/2011 | Andrew C. McCarthy

Posted on 11/23/2011 3:00:13 PM PST by TBBT

A reply to some reader reaction to my post a little earlier.

I don’t mean to be obtuse. What Newt said just did not strike me as a big deal. For what little it may be worth, I am opposed to any program that would legalize the presence of illegal aliens — certainly at this premature stage of enforcement and certainly without some stringent conditions. I’ve always thought it was silly for the pro-Amnesty crowd to grouse about how you can’t deport 12 (or 15, or 20 …) million people given that nobody sensible suggests that such a thing is either possible or desirable. Attrition by rational enforcement — targeting the worst offenders and the employment magnet — is the best approach because it is both economical and effective: it would induce illegal aliens to leave on their own (or refrain from coming in the first place), and it would dedicate the very limited resources available for immigration enforcement to the worst part of the problem.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: amnesty; andymccarthy; immigration

1 posted on 11/23/2011 3:00:15 PM PST by TBBT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]


We need to pass a law that we can keep any illegal alien we can catch.

2 posted on 11/23/2011 3:03:27 PM PST by isthisnickcool (Sharia? No thanks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

You don't have to deport 15 million people. You make the conditions intolerable for them here. You enforce a citizenship check for work. You arrest and send to jail CEOs and personnel managers for hiring illegals and heavily fine their companies. You don't even have to do that very many times, just a steady and very public enforcement for a short time, the Mexicans and Central Americans will go home and take their pre-employable citizen children with them. Most of the others will self deport also.

We should continue to allow illegals to have babies in American hospitals but the conditions should be that they take their citizen children home with them as they are deported or they can leave their babies here to be anonymously adopted out. We need the children but not as Mexicans or Hondurans.

3 posted on 11/23/2011 3:10:53 PM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus; TBBT
Too many imagine that the objective is to round the illegals up and march them South to Mexico.

That would be silly ~ for one thing they own MILLIONS of motor vehicles and we'd have to find ways to dispose of them.

I suggest they drive to Mexico, or prove why they can't ~ that is, that they belong somewhere else.

The whole idea that the difficulty in removing the illegals is a reason to not remove them is BIZARRE. Anyone who suggests that nobody "sensible" is even suggesting that hasn't bothered looking at the parameters of the problem.

It's doable if all that's done is fly them home to within a few miles of exactly where they were born ~ using empty seats normally found in our air transportation system in a 6 month period.

No one sensible can fail to comprehend that a modern state with highways, bridges, motor vehicles coming out the ying/yang CAN ship 'em out without being particularly brutal. We could buy doughnuts and coffee to make it easier.

4 posted on 11/23/2011 3:17:43 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


An irony I haven’t seen mentioned concerning Newt’s category of immigrants who have 25 years of living within the law, attending church and blah, blah, blah, that should be allowed to stay, is that the Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty of 1986 is now 25 years old.

So, Newt is eager as all get out to reward the first group illegal entrants and visa overstayers from 25 years ago, who were the first group of new illegal aliens lured by the enticement of future amnesties.

And here Newt is eager to reward that first new group of lawbreakers after the 1986 amnesty. And he can call it whatever he likes, but if the penalties prescribed by law are waived for a large group of people, that is the definition of an amnesty.

5 posted on 11/23/2011 3:18:52 PM PST by Will88 (N)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

Agreed. Newt and Perry just don’t get it. They are unacceptable.
The most disgusting aspect is that they are doubling down with on your face attitude.

Amnesty really is high priority for them.

At minimum, no preferential treatment should be given to illegals. Enforcement and border security and e-verify solve most of the problem.

6 posted on 11/23/2011 3:19:12 PM PST by heiss (heartless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


More of the same Shamnesty. Mr Pelosi couch potato Scozzafava can bite me. Too much Potomac water in the fig newton.

7 posted on 11/23/2011 3:27:04 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bailout)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Another bit of complete nonsense surrounding this issue is the notion that the border absolutely has to be secured first. That’s ridiculous. We could start stricter enforcement at the employer level the very day a president decides to do it. And I’m sure that are many existing laws that could be enforced, and that would start the self-deportations of many.

Border security absolutely needs to be improved greatly, but the notion that nothing else can be done until that happens is just one more “kick the can down the road” tactic by politicians who don’t really want to deal with stricter law enforcement.

8 posted on 11/23/2011 3:28:02 PM PST by Will88 (N)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


So don’t deport any! Is that what this imbecile wants? I am so sick of these open borders RINOs purporting to speak for all conservatives. We can easily deport between 2 and 3 million in a single year. We do not need to deport “15-20 million”. It is a straw man to scare folks into inaction. And why is Cain the only one standing with Arizona and Alabama? Alabama’s new law is already causing a sharp decline in unemployment. Enforcement WORKS, and puts American citizens back to work.

9 posted on 11/23/2011 3:35:36 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


I keep seeing too much emphasis on illegals from Mexico/So. America.

So I dug up this link on Nikolay Soltys, it relates the mass murder of several family members by the Ukrainian “Immigrant”.
None of the accounts I found specified if he was legal or not, but it was stated that the Sacramento CA area was home to 750,000 “immigrants” at that time.

The figures quoted for the number of illegals in the U.S. varies widely, I suspect the lower numbers are only Mexicans, the real number is probably well beyond the highest numbers publicly stated.

I want ALL illegals deported, or made so uncomfortable that they leave on their own, regardless of “race”, creed, color, or any other identifying trait.

As to families, no problem, they can show their solidarity by ALL going to the originating country of the illegal.

If they don’t love the illegal enough to go with them, the illegal should still be deported, permanently, with NO hope of ever returning to the U.S.

It’s past time to begin seriously enforcing the immigration laws we already have, no exceptions, no delays, and certainly NO amnesty!
This is the ONLY acceptable “Immigration reform”.

The invasion of illegals will continue until we PROVE we are serious about our national sovereignty and border integrity.

So far as I am concerned, the longer an illegal has been here the more they have stolen from America, the faster they should be stripped of their illegal proceeds (Asset forfeiture) and deported.
All illegals should be subjected to asset forfeiture before deportation.
There is no reason to allow them to keep any of their criminal profits.

Probably, but it’s the ONLY way to stop the flow of criminals into the U.S., and yes, illegal entry IS a crime.
It needs to be upgraded to a felony, nearly every other cerime has been made a felony already, why has this been left a misdemeanor?

10 posted on 11/23/2011 4:01:02 PM PST by Loyal Sedition
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Newt cow flopped big time...

Ya can’t put the bullet back in the gun.

11 posted on 11/23/2011 4:11:21 PM PST by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loyal Sedition

Oh, if only...IF ONLY one of the candidates would say just what you said in that post! They’d have my vote for sure.

12 posted on 11/23/2011 4:45:11 PM PST by Nea Wood (Silly liberal . . . paychecks are for workers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Legal smeagle. I want for once a GOP ‘leader’ to speak to the demographic deluge involved in this orchestrated invasion. The effects on our culture, nation and the destruction of our heritage. I want someone with balls to specifically address the wink wink, nod nod game of ethnic solidarity among LaRaza. To confront that race is used by the likes of LaRaza, MEChA, LULAC and the hundreds of other Hispanic based lobbying group to encourage and support this wholesale population change of our country.

The GOP better get a clue.

13 posted on 11/23/2011 5:06:28 PM PST by Altura Ct.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: heiss
Amnesty is the one act that will eliminate the Republican Party and any other party other than the Democrats at the national level and most of the state and local levels. Amnesty will quickly bring us the One Party Social Democrat State which will rapidly become totalitarian and inflict social micromanagement to an extent the old Russian Communists could only dream of. After achieving total control and before the Wall Street or the Alinskyite faction gets total control within the party there may be a split with a Spanish party emerging that will be just as totalitarian as the SocDems.That would produce something like sub rosa or not so sub rosa civil war between political twins. Such a state will also quickly produce famine and massive population reduction as the inevitable result of rigid socialism.
14 posted on 11/23/2011 9:01:59 PM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


I will not vote for any candidate who I believe will bring us Amnesty. I will not vote for a pro abort. Amnesty is the politically more dangerous policy. It will make us a One Democrat Party State forever, or until the State and the society collapse altogether.

15 posted on 11/23/2011 9:04:56 PM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson